heir
TOL Subscriber
I would hope not as 1 Corinthians 1:21 KJV and 2 Corinthians 5:19-21 KJV is why we are here!
sin/sins is not the issue today!
- Thread starter heir
- Start date
I would hope not as 1 Corinthians 1:21 KJV and 2 Corinthians 5:19-21 KJV is why we are here!
Shasta
Well-known member
If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth (1 John 1:6)
So it is possible for us to CLAIM to have fellowship with him while we are walking in darkness but John says if we did that claim would be a lie. The word "walk" in Hebrew is "halacha." It was a term that refers to how we conduct our lives before God. I have heard Rabbinical students using the term this way even today. Therefore when John talks about walking in the light or walking in the darkness he is talking about our choices and conduct which,we know, reflects the focus of our heart. In the language of the Bible Light and darkness are not merely referring to something existential but it has moral implications. To say we can be in the light no matter what we do is incompatible with the language of the scriptures.
And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments.
(1 John 2:3)
I do not have to strain at keeping the commandments as long as I walk in the Spirit. If I am knowing Him (by experience) I will find myself doing them.
Paul whom some call the "Apostle of Grace" commanded believers to obey what Jesus called the Greatest Command.
8 Owe no one anything, except to love each other, for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. 9For the commandments, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10 Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:8)
Paul was not against the moral Law just against our trying to do it in our own strength.
James agrees with the supremacy of what he called "The Royal Law"
8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you are doing well. (James 2:8)
John lays it out in uncompromising terms:
7 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. 8 Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. (I John 4:7-8)
Last edited:
Shasta
Well-known member
You are using the word do in the sense of doing a meritorious work but do also represents an act of the will. In that sense Paul most definitely called men to make choices - specifically the choice to believe in Christ. Inextricably bound in making Christ your God is departing from false Gods. Repentance from dead works and Faith towards God are two sides of the same coin.
I am saying this because some in your camp have said the difference between Paul and Peter is that Peter preached repentance. After checking it out I have found that Paul did also whether he always mentioned it or not.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Come on, Heir, don't play Jerry's game of having to always be right and have the last word. If you think you're correcting me, then you'd better read what I posted again. We're here but, I will say again, that certainly doesn't mean they will hear or even want to hear. Are you going to argue with that?
Shasta
Well-known member
First you say they were never in the faith in the first place. Then you say they were and that they LEFT but they are still sealed. You can't have it both ways.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Lord, spare me from these people who think they are such great teachers. :doh:
Yes, we all know people claim what they do not posses. But we all don't seem to know that we are not required to keep the commandments, do we? :hammer:
glorydaz
Well-known member
First you have to learn to read, then you might be able to actually have a discussion. :chuckle:
glorydaz
Well-known member
You are using the word repentance......
Repentance is a change of mind. A change of mind for the Jews, who believed in God but trusted in their works, is different from repentance for the gentiles which is a change of mind from unbelief to belief. That's why you see a difference between Peter's preaching of repentance and Paul's.
glorydaz
Well-known member
:blabla:
Last edited:
Yep.
You, I don't like. No offence intended. Yeah, right.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
If you don't like him personally, you still have to admire his relentless tenacity. I believe the Apostle Paul was like that.
Dan Emanuel
Active member
A change of mind for the Jew's, has little to do with what they believe about there work's.
1 thing they repent of, is not believing that Jesus is the Christ/Messiah, but this isn't even the most important thing.
Jew's need to repent of not believing that Jesus is the Son of God. (Jew's need to repent of not believing in the Trinity, in essence, if you boil it down.) Then, will they accept that it was there unbelief, that crucified our Lord of glory.
That is repentance for Jew's. They believe in God, yes, as you say; but they don't believe that God can or did become a man, when He sent His only Son, conceived of the Holy Spirit, to be born of the Virgin Mary.
DJ
1.0
Shasta
Well-known member
John wrote his first letter in part to combat false teachers (1 John 2:26) that had left the Church to form factions (1 John 2:19). Internal evidence suggests that they had adopted a proto-Gnostic belief system called Docetism which held that Christ did not actually come in the flesh but was an apparition, that he did not actually die or rise again. This is why the Apostle talks about Christ being come "in the flesh."
This group came out of neo-Platonism which held that the material world is bad and that the only perfect realm was the invisible spiritual world of the ideal. Both from what John said and from what the Church apologist Irenaeus (130 - 202AD) wrote later we understand that these people believed that, since the material world was irrelevant what a person did with his body did not matter. One in whom the divine essence had been planted could engage in any kind of immoral practice while remaining a child of Light.
The Gnostic's analogy according to Irenaeus was that "as gold immersed in mud retains it's essence" so could they engage in any sin (as much as they wished) and not lose the divine nature in them. They also used the argument I hear frequently that: 'once born as a son one cannot be unborn' Irenaeus objected to this, saying that spiritual sonship was not completely analogous to natural birth insofar as fleshly birth had to do with material (non moral) processes while spiritual birth was moral and relational. Spiritual birth did not mean as the Gnostics thought 'being implanted with an unchangeable divine deposit or essence' Rather, being born of the Spirit meant moving into right relationship with God. That right relationship enabled spiritual union which produces the fruit of the new nature.
These people claimed that they were "in the light" while they were walking in the darkness (living a lifestyle of sin). John says this is impossible since God is light and fellowship with Him necessarily meant walking in accordance with His nature. "Walking" as used in the Old Hebrew sense referred not to absolute perfection but to the particular pattern of choices that characterize our way of life. Walking in the light meant that our choices were compatible with His nature.
Far from the modern PC idea of "not judging" John is giving believers a way of judging (or discerning) true believers from false. The Docetists who walked in a way that was antagonistic to the laws of God were liars. Those who are really in the Light, John tells us, will behave in accordance with God's nature.
Irenaeus views on this subject are particularly significant because his teacher/pastor had been Polycarp of Smyrna (the one mentioned in the Revelation). Polycarp's teacher was the Apostle John himself.
Here is a brief article on the subject.
http://hermeneutics.stackexchange.c...rs-1-john-is-written-against-mentioned-in-226
glorydaz
Well-known member
I think it does.
Romans 10:10
Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
Dan Emanuel
Active member
Glory, of course I accept everything in the Scripture --I'm only saying that what Jew's or anybody believe's about there work's, is of minor importance, compared with repenting of not believing in Jesus (John 3:18 KJV).
We agree here, right? I mean, we'd agree that two people, 1 of whom believe's that they need to obey Jesus, and another who does not --that the 1st person --if they also believe in Jesus --will enter the kingdom before the second, if the second person does not believe in Jesus --right?
DJ
1.0
Shasta
Well-known member
The Bible never identifies two types of repentance. It only uses the word metanoia a "change of mind" Whether that meant turning away from idols, a life of sin or from trying to justify oneself by works was an individual matter. Do you think all Jews were acting like Pharisees in trying to keep the whole law? What about the tax collectors who were Jewish but who extorted money from the people. Were they trying to obtain eternal life by good works? What about a Jew who did not practice Judaism - like the prostitutes? What about Gentiles who were trying to be virtuous. Those who were into Aristotle made it their goal to live a virtuous life. They probably tended to be self righteous. Other Gentiles were trying to follow the requirements of the Mosaic law. Every person has their own form of idolatry they turn from when they begin to trust Christ.
Your narrow definition of repentence, intended to support MAD, does not hold up under scrutiny. The fact that your view cannot be found within the text is evidence that it is eisegesis and not exegesis.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Well, I can agree that unbelievers aren't saved. :thumb:
